hapless_fool wrote:
I’d kick the guy in the balls.
Weird scenes at the Canadian Open - Chess Forums - Chess.com
Opponent is losing, keeps putting me in CHECK
Sort:
Elliotda escribió:
I think chess.com should remove all the impolite, argumentative posts. I just came here for the first time, and I see stuff like, I'd kick him in the balls? Moderator, please do your job. Thank you.
Well, I hadn't seen it until you posted this, and probably would never have.
You can't win if your king is exposed enough to get checked the whole time, that's a fair strategy for him and checking someone multiple times does not cause a stalemate... that's an entirely different thing.
Pulpofeira wrote:
Elliotda escribió:
I think chess.com should remove all the impolite, argumentative posts. I just came here for the first time, and I see stuff like, I'd kick him in the balls? Moderator, please do your job. Thank you.
Well, I hadn't seen it until you posted this, and probably would never have.
Now if they would just remove all the posts that refer back to all the impolite, argumentative posts that nobody would have seen in the first place.
Fair enough.
Mar 21, 2021
0
#47
But then they would also have to remove anyposts that mentioned posts that referred back to impolite, argumentative posts.
That way lies madness.
Mar 21, 2021
0
#48
Perhaps they should just make oblique, veiled references to them. You know... discreet hints.
*nudge*nudge*wink*wink*
Don't remove the original impolite argumentative posts. Just remove the posts that refer back to them.
Mar 21, 2021
0
#50
bling_blang_blaow wrote:
lfPatriotGames hat geschrieben:
Don't remove the original impolite argumentative posts. Just remove the posts that refer back to them.
but how are we supposed to have an easy to follow discussion?
Won't anyone think of the snowflakes??? 
Mar 21, 2021
0
#51
People who feel that they have a "right" to never be exposed to anything that might offend them (such as seeing an argumentative or impolite post) are called "Snowflakes" in English (or at least, in American English).
It's called perpetual check. It's done to delay the checkmate 
Mar 21, 2021
0
#53
Referring back to the original post... if the opponent has a forced draw by perpetual check, then in what sense is he "losing"?
This must be some specialized usage of the word "losing" of which I was not aware.
Yep
Same thing happened to me but usually what happens is ur opponent blunders aftrr a while of checking so I got his queen (which was checking me) so keep playing until ur opponent blunders...at least that's how i do it!
I don’t understand how you can learn chess and be as confused as the OP is.
If anyone feels the same as the OP, please look up the endgame technique called “Philidor position” and learn how to play it, and disabuse yourself forever of the idea that there is something wrong with an “endless barrage of checks”.
If anyone feels the same as the OP, please look up the endgame technique called “Philidor position” and learn how to play it, and disabuse yourself forever of the idea that there is something wrong with an “endless barrage of checks”.
Oct 23, 2021
0
#57
Ubik42 wrote:
I don’t understand how you can learn chess and be as confused as the OP is.
If anyone feels the same as the OP, please look up the endgame technique called “Philidor position” and learn how to play it, and disabuse yourself forever of the idea that there is something wrong with an “endless barrage of checks”.
If anyone feels the same as the OP, please look up the endgame technique called “Philidor position” and learn how to play it, and disabuse yourself forever of the idea that there is something wrong with an “endless barrage of checks”.
Good advice @Ubik42! i too am learning, albeit quite slowly and your comment prompted me to look it up. A very good and useful tool to have the tool box. This will definitely help me. (No puns this time 
) Thank you!
Wits if you like that, I recommend an endgame book from Jeremy Silman, I think it’s called “The complete endgame course”, it orders the study for what you need by rating level. I think both the “Philidor” and the related “Lucena” position are for class C or B in his book.
It goes from “unrated” to “Master”
It goes from “unrated” to “Master”
I think chess.com should remove all the impolite, argumentative posts. I just came here for the first time, and I see stuff like, I'd kick him in the balls? Moderator, please do your job. Thank you.